[ga] Complaint

["babybows.com" <webmaster@babybows.com>]

In Melbourne, the ICANN Board clearly signaled that DNSO structural changes
are forthcoming.  This should be a "wake-up call" to all of you, unless of
course you prefer such changes to be implemented without the benefit of your
input.

[Resolution 01.28] The Board asks the Names Council and other sources to
separate their proposals into those that improve operations of the DNSO as
it is constituted today and those which may result in changes in the
structure of the DNSO and/or major changes in its functioning.

In 27 days we begin our talks in Stockholm.   I have yet to see any
meaningful discussion regarding the creation of an Individual's Constituency
on any of the GA lists.  Is this no longer a topic of concern?  Has the
passion for this initiative vaporized?  Or perhaps you are waiting for the
Names Council to decide on the criteria for constituency admission for you
without your input.  Yes, the GA lists will still be here for you to
complain and whine about matters afterward... or maybe I have misunderstood,
and you are perfectly willing to become a Constituency that can't "afford"
to exercise its right to vote.

I recall that members of the General Assembly participated in the Review
Working Group and spiritedly argued for the establishment of an Individual's
Constituency, while others argued with equal vigor for the dissolution of
the current constituency structure; other proposals called for the creation
of additional constituencies, and one proposal (practically unopposed)
called for the GA itself to become a constituency.

What has happened to your fervor?  I expected more from you.  Yes, it would
be nice if the Board handed you a Constituency on a silver platter; just
don't hold your breath... you may actually have to work to make this happen.
For those of you that advocated other structural changes, where are your
plans, your proposals, your funding mechanisms?  Give us something to work
with... or choose to accept whatever the Board may be forced to dictate in
the absence of your contributions.

In response to the needs of the Assembly and the expressed wishes of its
membership, the GA has established a number of new mailing lists to provide
a focused forum for ongoing dialogue.  One such list, ga-review, was
specifically created so that subsequent to the closure of the Review WG
mailing list by the Names Council, our members would have the opportunity to
continue to discuss these impending changes... so far, not one comment has
been made on this list.   Do you require an invitation?

How do you expect the GA to adopt any resolutions in support of any
initiatives if we do not engage in a thorough discussion of the issues?
You are expected to attempt to arrive at a consensus.

Let me remind you that the Review WG completed its preliminary work and
generated a thorough report within 3 weeks (Dec.23 - Jan. 15).  I expect no
less from you.

We have a job to do.   Let's get to work.


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html